The Temptations of an Artist

Can you “sell your soul to the devil” to become a great artist? Legend has it Robert Johnson stood at the crossroads at midnight to sell his soul to the devil. He thereby became the classic icon of blues guitar he is today. This famous legend raises the question: is it possible to “sell your soul to the devil” in the quest to become a great artist? Of course when we imagine the devil as a funny red man with stubby horns, four legs and an inexpensive pair of black tights, it’s a pretty humorous scene. It also seems pretty distant to our present reality as artists.


Yet Jesus temptation in the desert, in Luke 4, is the spittin’ image of the Artist at the Crossroads, being tempted to sell his soul to the devil. The One through whom the world was made stands in the wilderness, confronted by the one who seeks to un-create the world back into darkness and chaos. It is a crossroads for the direction of Jesus’ ministry, and for the future of the creation he was sent to redeem to God. I believe there are some immense implications here for our temptations as artists as we look at Christ, the Grand Artist, standing before the Un-creator. We’ll take a look at what his temptation consists of, how it shows up specifically in our lives as artists, and what it means to “walk in his steps” to overcome.



The three temptations of Jesus we might sum up as: “bread”, “authority”, and “the wow factor” (thanks to our pastor Rick for some of this insight in his recent sermon).

• Bread = money. The world needs bread. If you could turn stones to bread you could not only feed your own hungry self, you could feed the nations, feed the world. Jesus could end world hunger. The ability to turn stones to bread would be a good thing. But to do so he has to sell his soul and give up on God’s timing, hand over the creation to the Un-creator.
I think as artists this shows up in the temptation to give up on our convictions in the need for sustenance. We need to eat. We need to make a living, and the term “starving artist” didn’t get popular for nothing. We need bread, dough, money, today. Money is today’s equivalent of bread, its not for nothing they call it “bread” or “dough”. Its what we need to survive on and make us “full”. And when we’re hungry its easy to want to sell our integrity to make a quick buck. Trusting God and giving him glory is a lot tougher when the bank account is empty.

I spoke recently with a friend of mine who works in advertising who had really wrestled with some of the products he was attempting to sell. He wrestled with the legitimacy of the Oregon Lottery, a client he had done a major campaign for. Were their practices ethical? With some of his salon product clients, was he trying to make people feel crappy about the way they looked in order to present this product as their Savior? He could make lots of money taking these accounts and the family needed money. These are difficult questions and I’m not saying the answers are simple, but he was convicted that he would no longer take on clients whose practices he found he could not align ethically with, even if it hurt financially. He likewise committed to making ads that didn’t rely on making people feel crappy about themselves in order to sell a product. He would have to trust God to get more creative. God has provided greatly for him and his business has attracted a large clientele of ethical products he can come behind in good conscience.
The temptation to “turn these stones to bread” today means to sell out our integrity to make a buck. Trusting God and giving him glory means we will stand tall when times are tough and look to God for our sustenance in his good time and hold on to our integrity in our work.

• Kingdoms = Name. Jesus is tempted with the kingdoms of the world. Wouldn’t the world be a lot better place if Jesus was in charge? As the New Testament makes clear, Jesus is actually in authority over the world. God has exalted him to the highest place and it is at his name that every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that he is lord. He is being tempted with something that is in fact the reality of the coming world and is a good thing. But Jesus receives his name from the Father, not by bowing to the Un-creator. For a time the Un-creator has been given reign, and Jesus must not seek making a name for himself for its own sake, but staying true to his mission for the glory of the Father.

As artists I think this shows up in the temptation to bypass sacrifice, training and discipline to merely pursue a quick & easy name for ourselves. Many artists have made a name for themselves in history: Warhol. Picasso. Michelangelo. The irony is they didn’t seem to do so by trying to make a name for themselves. Rather, they loved the art, pursued it with passion and devoted themselves to their craft. The name followed the genius with which they blessed the world.


The order is important. The temptation as artists is always to flip the order. We want the glory without the sacrifice. The masterpiece without the discipline and training. The resurrection without the cross. The irony is if our desire to make a name for ourselves is given a higher priority than a simple love of the art and desire to glorify God and give to the world in our lives as artists, than the integrity of our art is destroyed.


If we prioritize our glory, we generally destroy our art. It becomes something different than it would have been otherwise. If Christ had ruled over the kingdoms of the world by brute force and aligned himself with the devil, it would be a different kind of reign. There is something crucial to the type of reign Christ exhibits that is modeled in servitude, suffering and sacrificial love of the other. God establishes Christ’s reign when it is fulfilled through redemptive and sacrificial love for the world, rather than the pursuit of his glory over the world. As artists, the pursuit of God’s glory over our own is crucial to living lives of integrity as artists. Do we do what we do for the glory of God or to make a name for ourselves? Its easy to give in to the latter when the name is so appealing. But the way a name is truly made for oneself is when it is not the priority.

• Jump = Fame. Jesus is finally tempted with what we might call the “wow” factor: if you’ve ever seen someone jump from the Empire State Building, get caught in mid-air by the grand heavenly host, and land like a cat on all your feet, then you know what I mean. People applaud, crowds looking for a sign are pretty impressed. All the world will be amazed. Jesus can really draw the crowds and have them drooling for more if he gives into this one.

I think as artists this shows up in our willingness to sacrifice our integrity for fame: to have the audiences clamoring for more. Perhaps the most difficult addiction for some artists is this desire for fame, for applause. To be admired and have everyone look up to us and love us. Michael Scott in The Office is a hilarious example of this: he is entirely driven by the desire for people to like him, to think he’s a cool boss, and he makes an idiot out of himself in order to do it. His role as a manager becomes subservient to the desire to become ‘cool’ and liked by everyone.


When I get really honest with myself I have a lot more of Michael Scott in me than I’d like to admit. When I’m preparing to give a talk its easy for me to immediately become obsessed with “what will people think of me?” “will they like me?” “will they think my ideas are meaningful?” How many of us as artists are locked in a standstill because we’re afraid to put the pen to paper and have our ideas bare-naked before the world? The question: “what will people think?’ is the strongest instigator of writers-block known to man. Our fear of what people will think keeps us from growing more fully into mature artists in our craft.


Likewise, in a desire to have people like us and fulfill their expectations, we’ll often sell out our integrity as artists and as people of God. (If you’ve seen Extras, season two, in the scene where Ricky Gervais gives in to wearing the wig & glasses & parroting the catch-line is a classic example of the mental anguish of selling out, as David Bowie is plenty quick to let him know in a later episode). Of course everyone points to corporate culture, California party culture, or frat culture for “selling out” in a desire to be liked, successful and accepted, but I believe it is perhaps more sinisterly present in much of the arts’ anti-fame culture.


Take for example the hipster phenomenon. I’ve become convinced that the whole hipster phenomenon is driven more than any other factor by this “Michael Scott” phenomenon. I love Portland to death, yet I feel in it like I am surrounded by a city of urban hipsters who are addicted to what people think of them. We’re obsessed with what we don’t wear, what brand names we’re not identified with, how we look when we go out, not in the usual “prettied up” forms but almost as an “anti-style”. Of course, for many it comes under the guise of a subtle indifference, a façade of “I don’t care what people think of me”, but its such an obvious and thin cover for a more unkempt version of Michael Scott, unshaven with matted hair and retro clothes crying out to meet the new rules of cool and be looked up to. And we’re often some of the most cynical, pessimistic, and depressingly miserable folks around.


From the California hotties to the Northwest hipsters, we’re a generation totally sold out to “jumping off the cliff” if people will be into it, if it will get us the “wow” factor, and make a name for ourselves as cool and admired. Following Christ means giving up on the “cool” game attempting to wow the world, and frees us to be more truly creative and freely ourselves.

Jesus is tempted with good things: feed the world, rule justly, draw all men to himself in glory. But in the wrong time and way. Similarly, its good to make a living as artists, to have a name established for our work, to be blessed with a following and reputation. But the temptation is to sell our integrity and marginalize our devotion to God in our pursuit of these things. Prioritizing God frees us to be more truly ourselves in our artistic pursuit.

A Sweep Through Church History (Arts Seminar Recap)

Tim Timmerman gave a great lecture tonight which gave us a sweep through art in church history. One of the biggest things I took away was a strong sense of being part of a history, of such a bigger movement, of people and passion and particularities of time and place which are so much bigger than just our present location today. The richness and complex diversity of the church’s relationship with the arts throughout church history is really inspiring—to not just be an isolated person today but part of a broader, ongoing movement with spiraling ingenuity and adapting innovation.

A few highlights that stood out to me: 1) “hidden” art: how in many late medieval cathedrals and architecture there were intricate sculptures and carvings up 1200 feet and higher where no one could see them. Often depicting bible stories and characters, the artists making these knew no one would ever see them but they still put so much time, intention, intricacy and beauty into them. We can see them now and there is so much put into them. The motivation Tim explored was how for these artists this was an intimate devotion and offering to God, so even if no one ever saw them they were inspired to create masterworks in intimate devotion to God. This challenges me to ask: if no one were to ever see the art we do, hear the songs we write, would we still make them for the sheer joy, beauty and pleasure of God and in intimate devotion to Him? Is God our grandest audience we delight to create for and with?

2) Tim also looked at some of the complex reasons for the Reformation’s reaction against art (ie. rich art in the late medieval period being funded largely by indulgences, extortion and the opulent wealthy on the backs of the poor) in contrast to the earlier medieval art and architecture which had a stronger community-participation base. This was interesting as I often had the assumption it was always a simplistic “images = idols” equation. It was helpful to understand some of the more intricate cultural context Tim unpacked for the Reformation’s reaction, while still mourning much of the art perspective that was lost in much of the Protestant tradition.

3) One of my favorite pieces was some of the amazing art done by contemporary Christian visual artists today. Some of the big ones that stood out to me were the works of: Tim Hawkinson, Mary McCleary, Tim Lowly, Lynn Aldrich, George Tooker, Makoto Fujimura. Tim gave some great backdrops and explanations for the impetus behind their work. Some websites he recommended are:

http://www.civa.org/ (Christians in the Visual Arts)
http://www.timlowly.com/ (Tim Lowly—has some great links to other artists as well!)
http://www.marymccleary.com/ (Mary McCleary—lots of objects and “googly” eyes representing God’s all-seeing and wild perspective)
http://www.timtimmerman.com/ (great artist! Our speaker tonight—check out his awesome stuff)

Lord Save Us From Your Followers (Arts Seminar Recap)

This was a great lecture (sorry I’m a little late in writing). Actually, Dan Merchant first showed his upcoming film, “Lord Save Us From Your Followers” which has been picked up by Sony / EMI and is set to be nationally released this summer. After a viewing of the movie we spent about 1.5 hours in some great q + a. I highly recommend you see the movie, and here’s some things that struck me about the movie & conversation.

The film was a documentary focused on Christianity and contemporary culture, particularly political culture, with the illuminating subtitle: “Why is the Gospel of Love Dividing America?” A lot of it focuses on how we as the church have by-and-large in America presented a public image that is angry, hostile, divisive and un-civic. One of the things I really appreciated is how Dan doesn’t critique the church from the outside but identifies with the church along the lines of the classic Augustine quote: “the church is a whore, and she’s my mother.” He critiques not to see the church torn down but to call it to its calling to embody its witness to the kingdom of God more fully, compassionately and constructively in our culture.

It had kind of the feel of a “Super-Size Me”, of an everyday Joe who’s trying to figure out this complex thing of Christianity in America. He spent 2.5 years interviewing folks from Al Franken to Rick Warren to Bono to Tony Campolo to John Perkins to Michael Reagan to… all sorts of man-on-the-street interviews. While showing some really “hard-to-watch” pieces of how we make a fool of ourselves as the church in America, he also showed some really redemptive images (ie. World Vision’s partnership with a local radio station, the church’s response to Hurricane Katrina). I think the film is a great thought-provoker and conversation-starter on the church in contemporary culture, as the engaging ensuing conversation ‘til 10pm affirmed. Check out more on the movie at: www.lordsaveus.net.

who is an artist?

One question I've heard hopping around alot lately has been the question: "who is an artist?" so i thought i'd post my thoughts here. The root of the discussion often explores a spectrum mediating between two possible extremes. On the one hand, my child is an artist because his fingerpaintings are supreme, my father is an artist because of the skill and craft with which he works on his car, I am an artist because I dabble with the guitar every now and then, and my mother is an artist because of the brilliant style, decor and intentional touch she puts into her home and office. On this side of the spectrum, everyone is an artist, and the encouragement is to help motivate the creative potential inherent in everyone.

While the above is obviously true in many respects, something within us reacts quickly: but what of Pavarotti, Rembrandt, Kubrick and Austen? Is it really fair to put my tinkering around on the guitar or my dad with his car on the same level of such creative genius? If I do have I not exhausted the very content of what the word "artist" has traditionally intended to signify? In labeling everyone an artist do we not violate against a proper recognition of that class of people who are devoted with an intensity and passion to the point of sacrifice to the development of their creative expression in their particular medium? Does this not in some respect demean the gift and and contribution they make to the life of society as a whole? Is this perhaps equivalent in some ways to saying that because I currently market and sell my cds online (shameless plug) or that my child sells lemonade at a lemonade stand that we are businessmen in the same sense as Donald Trump?

I believe the statements: "everyone is an artist" and "only a few are artists" are both equally true in their own way and each reference the term artist significantly but differently. I'd like to explore briefly here thoughts on each from a more theological perspective.

Everyone is an Artist
Where I often first go in thinking of everyone as an artist is the imago Dei, the image of God that humanity is created in. "In the beginning, God created..." God first reveals himself in his story as Creator, and introductions are important, first impressions say something about who you are and how you want to be known (thanks to Martin French for this point on Genesis). So God chooses his first impression, opening his story revealing the very first thing about himself as Artist, as Creator, as one with creativity inherent in his very being, bringing forth life and diversity and color and form. And "God created humanity in his own image" (Gen. 1:27). In a passage flooded through and through with God's identity as Creator, he creates humanity, male and female, in his image. Now this at the very least says something that creativity is a part of the "DNA" of what it means to be human. To be made in the image of this God is in at least some respect to have creativity and artistry embedded in the very core of your humanity. To revel and splurge in this God-mirroring attribute is at the least a part of what it means to enter more fully into the blessed existence of life with our Creator. And this is not for the sole privilege of a few artist elites, but for all humanity, male and female, as image-bearers of our Triune Creator.

After preaching a sermon on some themes like this last year, I was approached by a great man from our congregation I really respect and admire. He's quite a bit older than I am, definitely more of a sports background (football in particular--he could still kick my butt easy) and said after the sermon he'd felt quite convicted. His home community had met for lunch and talking about it he realized he'd always identified himself more as a "jock" and hadn't seen himself as having "an artistic bone in my body" as he so eloquently put it. But standing before his Creator, an Artist with creativity inherent deeply within his very life and identity as God, and being created in his image, he felt to deny creativity in his own life was tantamount to blasphemy denying the very image of God in him. The home community had discussed how creativity could bring a new God-given richness to their lives: from the way they approached decorating their homes and offices, to the way they went about their current writing projects and family endeavors, to cultural appreciation of some of the amazing art forms in society today.

I think this elevates an important piece of the gospel: that our God is Creator and creativity is an important part not only of our Father's inherent life but of his image in us. The imago Dei calls us all in some respect to approach life with creativity and artistic passion. Bringing this blessing to our world and recognizing it in everyone: from the child's fingerpaintings to the hobbyist on their instrument to the decor, floral arrangement and culinary display at home will make for a richer life in the gospel.

But this is not all, this brings us to the second point of the way in which only a few are artists.

Only a few are artists
It is often noted that the first mention of someone being filled with the Spirit of God in Scripture is an artist, Bezalel son of Uri, filled with the Spirit for the purpose of creating the Tabernacle where God's presence will dwell with his people. (Exodus 31) Not only so, but as this passage develops it is the artists with the greatest skill and ability in their craft who give themselves in devotion to creating a place of beauty to magnify and reflect the glorious presence of God. The Tabernacle for God's presence was in some respect an image of "new creation", for as under Adam's rebellion the creation under his authority suffered with him withdrawal away from God's presence, the Tabernacle was a redeeming place where God's creative presence was "breaking in" towards the redemption of his creation. The artists were thus called to play an important role in this redemptive act of "new creation", partnering with God towards his showing up in a broken world with redemptive new life and transforming presence.

Its important to note that this was not just "everyone with a hammer" come on out and build. These were artists in the more exclusive sense of the word, those who were highly skilled and devoted to their craft. And this brings me to the point: I believe strongly there is an exclusive sense in which only some are artists. What defines this some in my eyes is a devotion to one's craft that involves a pursuit of excellence at the highest level, perhaps in some circumstances a 'natural' gift (I put natural in quotes as I believe this gift itself is to be regarded with gratitude as God-given, rather than merely the product of 'nature' in the contemporary materialistic sense of the term), and perhaps most of all requires some level of sacrifice in the pursuit of this excellence. This sacrifice might be the time required towards the development of one's craft, the money for proper materials, or perhaps the abandonment of other more lucrative possible potentials and endeavors to get good. I believe this higher devotion of priority and development of skill sets the true artist apart from the mere hobbyist and apart from the broader scope of creativity inherent in all humanity.

While on this Exodus passage, however, I believe there are a few remaining points to be made to this more elite class of artists. First, one does not need to deal with explicitly "Christian" or "spiritual" subject matter to do meaningful work towards the glory of God. The objects of the tabernacle include many "earthy" things: images of trees and flowers and pomegranates (Exodus 31-33). There is a rejoicing in the "secular" creation (which of course God has made) but God does not need his name all over it in this sense in order to be glorified. Rather, as the priests entered the Holy of Holies through the candlesticks decorated with trees and flowers and nature and all, and wearing pomegranates (a common Middle Eastern fruit) dangling from their robes, there was a strong sense to their mediating the creation (estranged under Adam) into the redemptive presence of God. As Francis Schaeffer noted on this long ago (in his classic "Art & the Bible") its also striking that the pomegranates are made in blue and purple (rather than their 'real' color red). Creative license is given to "play around" with the elements of creation outside their explicit natural form. This picture shows us that in the very early life of Israel, there would have been a sense of the "earthiness" of art, and the ability to rejoice in the "secular" (again always with the awareness of its God-given reality). This is even more elaborately displayed when the Temple is later constructed under Solomon (where the tabernacle finds its true home) with elaborate works of art, immense craftsmanship, and extravagant music.

I believe today our more elite class of artists can find encouragement to develop one's God-given artistic identity in devoted relationship with God in the making of mainstream art that is not explicitly "religious" "Christian" or "spiritual" in content or expression. This should provide great freedom for the many filmmakers, musicians, graphic designers and more pursuing their craft with passion and devotion in the mainstream sphere.

Second, however, there is an obvious call to the artist to do so and to do all to the glory of God. God is working redemptively in our world and is passionately pursuing to be re-united with an alienated creation. The artist is not called to develop his skill and craft for his own glory but for the glory of this God. The artist is not called to make a name for herself or garnish lots of money as the measure of success, but to participate in the creative life and passion of God and to make His name great: if not through the explicit content of work created then through the devotion and obedience of a life lived faithfully in artistic excellence and union with God.

In conclusion then, in response to the question: "who is an artist?" I believe a proper biblical response must have two complementary sides to do justice to the fuller picture. One side of this is that God is Creator and all our created in his image; creativity is an inherent part of the imago Dei in all of humanity, male and female, professional artist and child, and the world is greatly enriched and blessed when we employ artistic display and creative approach to all of life. On the other side is that there are some who through devotion, sacrifice and skill are artists in a more exclusive sense with a specific calling. They are distinct yet related to the broader society: distinct in the sense that they are an elite in the artistic sphere with specific skill and gifts to bring to the table; yet related in the sense that they are called to battle against the elitist spirit which plagues so much of contemporary arts culture, to see themselves not as above or removed from society but as one of many cultural streams (business, government, health, education, etc.) whose calling is to bless society and play a constructive role (or perhaps at times a prophetic de-structive role) in bringing their gifts to the table towards the enrichment of life in God's world for His glory.